"Criticism" in science or someone's hypothesis is a valuable tool in the process. Don't confuse Rational Criticism with a pissing match or criticism of the person
Excellent article on venom and now this excellent, reasoned stance on dialogue. I appreciate your perspective and expertise. Hardened ideologies are not helpful.
Precisely. The skeptical community is plagued with its own unscientific misinformation and closed-mindedness. We have to keep steering the bike between two ditches on either side. Well done.
Keep going Dr. Jack. Hopefully Dr. Ardis is also of the same opinion that rational discourse moves us all forward (and doesn’t take it personally)…A tough trick to master no doubt.
Excellent! I feel refreshed when scientists question! Blindly following all of novel thoughts posed is akin to following a narrative...all be it a newer one. Thanks so much for sharing what you find/think and offer in your educational services.
I think your previous article is completely necessary considering the gravity of the claims that have been made regarding the venom.
I am no scientist, but am skeptical of the “in the water” hypothesis simply from an economic and logistical perspective. Am I mistaken in my understanding that venoms do not replicate and therefore the dose of venom would need to be manufactured in its entirety before it is put to use?
For instance, could someone with more time and data crunching prowess than myself run the numbers on what dilution levels would be required to put into the water supply to have a deleterious effect on a given population. Then from there multiply that by all the major water districts in the world. My napkin math says it’s not economically feasible and would require a truly enormous, globally coordinated logistics effort between countries with dodgy diplomacy. It honestly just doesn’t seem like an efficient bio weapon to me. Now a virus, which is a factory all on its own, sounds more feasible since it produces its toxins on its own, while its on the move.
I'm one of the people who contacted you privately to look into this, and I didn't see anything unprofessional in what you pointed out. I'm not a medical professional, and watched the brighteone and Stu Peters videos, and there were some components I had difficulty accepting mostly associated with the claims/inferring that the virus itself was a snake venom (which doesn't spread like an airborne virus), and that it was transferred through water (we chemically treat water, and it's taken orally)) that didn't sit well with me, and I asked for an expert review from you. And you provided it.
Thank you!
A point I want to make also is this: THIS is what scientific debate is SUPPOSED to be about - making a hypothesis, testing it, review the results. Perhaps bringing up another hypothesis, testing it and accepting/declining the solutions... or learning something new in the process. (rinse, lather, repeat)
In other words, there's not the air of censorship, or seeking for personal affirmation that's supposed to be in the mix. It's meant to be data-driven, and objective.
We should welcome a healthy debate! And not make it personal!
hi dr jack and community . can someone point me to the debate referenced here with the 'there is no virus' proponents ? actual debate or just an article? would love to see a video discussion with someone like Dr bailey from NZ or Dr Lanka.
I appreciate the tone of this article, and of your last snake venom article. 👍🏼 I really appreciate you, this is what science is about! As you point out, understanding rational thought is so important. Ad well as self-awareness of how our emotions and instincts and identity creation play into our beliefs and rational thought processes.
Hey, look what I found...from the April 2020 archives...it was being said right from the beginning...."Scientists who express different views on Covid-19 should be heard, not demonized" By Vinay Prasad and Jeffrey S. Flier April 27, 2020
“One cannot ever prove a negative” is what you mean, unless you’re joking.
Excellent article on venom and now this excellent, reasoned stance on dialogue. I appreciate your perspective and expertise. Hardened ideologies are not helpful.
Precisely. The skeptical community is plagued with its own unscientific misinformation and closed-mindedness. We have to keep steering the bike between two ditches on either side. Well done.
Keep going Dr. Jack. Hopefully Dr. Ardis is also of the same opinion that rational discourse moves us all forward (and doesn’t take it personally)…A tough trick to master no doubt.
I thought your criticism was fair, namely because you avoided condescension, vitriol, and hyperbole.
Thank you. For both articles and for being rooted in science.
Excellent! I feel refreshed when scientists question! Blindly following all of novel thoughts posed is akin to following a narrative...all be it a newer one. Thanks so much for sharing what you find/think and offer in your educational services.
🙀 Sounds like folks are being a tad censorious. Can rational dialog even exist today?
I think your previous article is completely necessary considering the gravity of the claims that have been made regarding the venom.
I am no scientist, but am skeptical of the “in the water” hypothesis simply from an economic and logistical perspective. Am I mistaken in my understanding that venoms do not replicate and therefore the dose of venom would need to be manufactured in its entirety before it is put to use?
For instance, could someone with more time and data crunching prowess than myself run the numbers on what dilution levels would be required to put into the water supply to have a deleterious effect on a given population. Then from there multiply that by all the major water districts in the world. My napkin math says it’s not economically feasible and would require a truly enormous, globally coordinated logistics effort between countries with dodgy diplomacy. It honestly just doesn’t seem like an efficient bio weapon to me. Now a virus, which is a factory all on its own, sounds more feasible since it produces its toxins on its own, while its on the move.
Outstanding essay!
Sanity prevails
Perspective is not criticism its an observation of whats in front of you. Many thanks for your perspective 🙏
I'm one of the people who contacted you privately to look into this, and I didn't see anything unprofessional in what you pointed out. I'm not a medical professional, and watched the brighteone and Stu Peters videos, and there were some components I had difficulty accepting mostly associated with the claims/inferring that the virus itself was a snake venom (which doesn't spread like an airborne virus), and that it was transferred through water (we chemically treat water, and it's taken orally)) that didn't sit well with me, and I asked for an expert review from you. And you provided it.
Thank you!
A point I want to make also is this: THIS is what scientific debate is SUPPOSED to be about - making a hypothesis, testing it, review the results. Perhaps bringing up another hypothesis, testing it and accepting/declining the solutions... or learning something new in the process. (rinse, lather, repeat)
In other words, there's not the air of censorship, or seeking for personal affirmation that's supposed to be in the mix. It's meant to be data-driven, and objective.
We should welcome a healthy debate! And not make it personal!
hi dr jack and community . can someone point me to the debate referenced here with the 'there is no virus' proponents ? actual debate or just an article? would love to see a video discussion with someone like Dr bailey from NZ or Dr Lanka.
I appreciate the tone of this article, and of your last snake venom article. 👍🏼 I really appreciate you, this is what science is about! As you point out, understanding rational thought is so important. Ad well as self-awareness of how our emotions and instincts and identity creation play into our beliefs and rational thought processes.
Hey, look what I found...from the April 2020 archives...it was being said right from the beginning...."Scientists who express different views on Covid-19 should be heard, not demonized" By Vinay Prasad and Jeffrey S. Flier April 27, 2020
https://www.statnews.com/2020/04/27/hear-scientists-different-views-covid-19-dont-attack-them/